Bhasha Vichar

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Bhasha Vichar" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, focusing on the key themes discussed:

The text "Bhasha Vichar" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, found in the publication "Z_Darshan_aur_Chintan_Part_1_2_002661.pdf," delves into linguistic and philosophical aspects within Jainism, particularly in comparison to Vedic traditions and early Buddhism.

1. Upavasatha/Pausadha: Vedic vs. Shraman Tradition

The author begins by exploring the origin of the practice of fasting, specifically "Upavasatha" in the Vedic tradition and "Uposatha" or "Pausadha" in the Shraman (Jain) tradition. He notes the difficulty in definitively stating which tradition influenced the other due to the ancient origins of these practices. However, he posits a key distinction:

• Vedic Upavasatha: Considered a means of attaining "preya" (what is pleasing or enjoyable).
• Shraman Uposatha/Pausadha: Considered a means of attaining "shreya" (what is beneficial or leads to spiritual liberation).

Sanghavi suggests that in the developmental sequence of human civilization, the concept of "shreya" likely emerged after "preya." If this is true, then even if the Shraman tradition's practice of fasting is ancient, it might bear the influence of the Vedic "Upayastha Yajna" (Vedic ritual).

2. Language Use (Bhasha Prayog) in the Nirgrantha Tradition

The text then shifts its focus to the practices of the Nirgrantha (Jain) tradition contemporary to and preceding Mahavira, highlighting language use, "tridanda" (the three vows of body, speech, and mind), and abstention from violence. A comparative study of Buddhist Pitakas and Jain Agamas is presented as a valuable tool for understanding these issues.

2.1. The Abhayarajakumara Sutta and Buddhist Discourse on Speech

The author discusses a passage from the Majjhima Nikaya's "Abhayarajakumara Sutta." This sutta describes a dialogue where King Abhayarajakumara questions the Buddha about speaking unpleasant truths.

• The Question: Mahavira is said to have asked Abhayarajakumara to inquire if the Buddha would speak unpleasant words. If the Buddha said "yes," he would be defeated (as an enlightened being should not speak unpleasantly). If he said "no," then why did he say Devadatta (a dissident monk) was destined for ruin and unreformable?
• The Buddha's Response: The Buddha explained that his speech is not absolute. He would speak words that are unpleasant but beneficial. However, he would not speak words that are harmful, even if they are true. Crucially, he stated that he would never speak untruths, whether they are pleasant or unpleasant. He would speak truthful words that are beneficial, even if they are unpleasant.
• Outcome: Hearing this nuanced explanation of speech, Abhayarajakumara became a follower of the Buddha.

2.2. The Genesis of the Abhayarajakumara Sutta and its Relevance to Jainism

Sanghavi speculates that this sutta might have been composed by the Buddha's disciples to absolve him of the accusation of speaking unfavorably about Devadatta, especially when the news of such pronouncements spread.

However, the author's primary interest lies in the language practices of the Nirgrantha tradition. He points out the well-known concept of "Bhasha-samiti" (carefulness in speech) within the Nirgrantha tradition, which is extensively detailed in Jain Agamas.

2.3. Comparing Bhasha-samiti in Jainism and Buddhism

When comparing the discussion of "Bhasha-samiti" in Jain Agamas (like Uttaradhyayana and Dashavaikalika) with the Abhayarajakumara Sutta:

• Essential Agreement: Sanghavi finds no fundamental difference in the underlying principles. Both traditions emphasize careful and considerate speech.
• Historical Context of Jain Bhasha-samiti: The crucial question is whether the discussion of "Bhasha-samiti" in Jain Agamas existed in the Nirgrantha tradition before and during Mahavira's time.
  • Sanghavi acknowledges that Mahavira was the leader of an already established Nirgrantha tradition with its own scriptural literature (the "Purvas").
  • Since the essence of asceticism ("shramanatva") is deeply rooted in behavioral conduct, including language, it is natural for rules of speech to be established within this tradition.
  • He believes Mahavira did not introduce reforms in this area, and Agamas like Dashavaikalika were composed shortly after his time.
  • Therefore, it is highly probable that the rules and regulations of "Bhasha-samiti" were integral to the Nirgrantha tradition even before Mahavira, and certainly during his time.

2.4. Conclusion on Jain Language Practices

Sanghavi concludes that the concept of "Bhasha-samiti" described in the Jain Agamas is not borrowed from Buddhist texts. Instead, it is a reflection of the pre-existing views and principles regarding careful speech within the ancient Nirgrantha tradition.

In essence, "Bhasha Vichar" explores the subtle distinctions in motivations behind ascetic practices like fasting in Vedic versus Jain traditions, and critically examines the historical development and fundamental principles of careful speech ("Bhasha-samiti") within the Jain (Nirgrantha) tradition, asserting its indigenous origins and continuity.